Well...reviews of Pioneer's Universal players have been mixed at best...best to leave sacd sound to Sony...they invented it...and are simply "licensing" it to promote the format...and the redbook sound on Pioneer's 45/47 elite series is supposedly pretty khaki...I will wait till more universal players are available...and at better prices.... |
Like many here, I've been in this hobby for close to 30 years. I have owned many fine turntables over the years including Linn, Sota, VPI and am now quite satisfied with a Well Tempered Reference. I pretty much agree with TWL, and at this level vinyl sure has my vote. Much of the music I own on LP has never been released on CD and likely never will. And has anyone here ever heard a decent Beatles CD? I held out for close to ten years after the introduction of CD before buying my first CD player. Until Meridian came out with the their first modified player it all sounded so bad to these ears. But there came a point when there really wasn't any choice if you wanted new music that was only available in a digital format. Thanks to high end audio we now have some really excellent players, DACs and transports. And the quality of digital recordings certainly has improved a great deal since those early ear bleeding days. One thing that has not changed though is the quality of some recordings are much better than others. I have plenty of LPs that I love but have to leave the room to listen to. Same with CDs. In the end it is the music that really matters and that's the only reason I'm in this silly hobby. I find it very interesting that today there are far more high end tables and cartridges than there ever were in the pre CD days. And although it's a bit expensive, there are a lot of new remastered LPs coming out all the time.
One of the really nice things that has come out of all of the digital format wars is it has made it possible for those of us on a budget to own very high end DACs, players and transports. So many people have sold off their DACs and players because they are afraid of missing out on the latest technology or are afraid to be left holding a rapidly depreciating asset. I own a Audio Logic DAC I picked up on Audiogon for only a $1000 that comes close enough to the sound of my turntable with a CEC TL2 belt drive transport to keep me very happy. As good as it may be, I too do not expect SACD to last for all the aforementioned reasons. But there are plenty of redbook CDs, and with musical DACs like my Audio Logic going for pennies on the dollar I don't care. I feel like I have the best of both worlds and that makes me happy. |
Most recently news articles have pronounced the death of CD players. Just no market since the mass market can buy a DVD player that also plays CD's and MP3's! Even some cheap Sony's can do SACD. Pioneer,that high-end brand, is making a univeral player. That's the future. |
Twl, the more i read about the compromises and complexities inherent in the digital format, the more i am inclined to believe you about vinyl...
however, i also agree w/ ghostrider and others about if music's the thing, the largest catalog wins. |
I do feel bad for the "early birds" who spent a ton of money on a false promise that this medium was really the answer to their prayers...then again...if you make compulsive purchases...you usually get burned....at any rate...I wouldn't advise spending alot of cash on a SACD... |
It's pretty ironic that someone with the moniker "Phasecorrect" is considering returning to vinyl! |
It's sad but true that most people are not interested or even aware of true hifi sound. That being the case I cannot see SACD ever shedding its niche status, and no amount of letters to Sony will change this, because Sony is a corporation and corporations exist to make money. I think the best case scenario is that Sony/Philips continues to make SACD capable chipsets and transport mechs and that niche high-end companies will make players for us.
I have to applaud Sony and Philips for even trying this, but I have seen the future, and it is MP3 :-( |
Quick, before it's too late! Somebody download this thread and e-mail it to the President of Sony. |
Like it or not, a lot of music (especially the jazz I listen to) simply isn't available on vinyl, so the quality issue is moot. It's the silver disk or nothing.
Actually the silver disc can sound pretty good (both redbook and SACD).
I hadn't listened to my turntable (an Oracle Paris, Audioquest arm, and a Shure Ultra 500 cartridge) in over a year. Recently I leveled it, cleaned it up, and tried listening to some vinyl again.
I had mixed reactions. Yes it sounded pretty good. However I could hardly call it perfect. The biggest problem I noted was the wow caused by slightly off center records. There was a time when I could ignore it, but now it really bugs me. There is also a noticable change in quality on the inner third of longer LP's.
So how do the rest of you vinyl listeners deal with this? Do you just rationalize it, or am I missing something?
I guess I could upgrade the turntable, but I don't think that that addresses the basic issues I mentioned. |
TWL, don't worry about it, I should of just pointed my views instead coming off the way I did. Thanks |
The only way SACD will become the common format is if the manufacturers start making ALL players and ALL discs CD/SACD hybrids AND continue to charge the same amount of money for both. The benefits of SACD would probably be somewhat drastic to most audiophiles, but we all have to admit that they're still relatively subtle improvements overall. I highly doubt that the average person with a $200 Sony SACD player, a $200 Sony 6 channel HT receiver, and a $200 pair of Bose speakers will hear any noticeable difference between CDs and SACDs. They have no incentive to spend more for SACD discs or players. The improved technology doesn't benefit them in the least. I assume that's why SACD and DVD-A both decided to focus on multi-channel music. They needed to provide the consumers with a tangible difference. I suppose we'll find out whether or not they care in the next year or two. |
I'm sorry Brian. Sometimes I get a little carried away on this subject. No offense intended. |
Hey 2ms,
I have an HT/music system and I find no such seduction in the idea of having to buy, or in most cases re-buy, a whole new collection of music. I'm having a good time discovering re-mastered CDs, MOFIs and the like to help enhance the enjoyment I get out of my CD based music system........John |
TWL, I pretty much agree with your comments; I took exception to your first post as it seems every time this subject comes up, inevitably there is a post paying all hail homage to the LP.
As for your classifications, as I said, I mostly agree. I would consider myself as someone who wants the most out of my high end, but I certainly do not want to deal with LP’s and/or a TT to do it, others enjoy doing so, this I understand. SACD disqualifies itself, for me, do to lack of hardware and software. This leaves me with CD, so I have a nice CD player for the format that works for me.
I do not subscribe to the theory that it is my, the consumers, fault if SACD fails. |
Once SACD players are the same price as redbook players (which they almost are already) and the volume of SACDs becomes substantial, then it will basically be dumb to buy a redbook player. Once people have SACD players, they'll buy SACDs (instead of redbook cds) whenever the music they want is offered. I hardly see how SACD could fail.
DAT was different. DAT players didn't play CDs and people couldn't play DATs on cd players. There are no such reasons for consumers to opt for redbook players over SACD players. Most new SACDs are hybrid cds (so people don't need to buy dupes for different players).
Also, the multichannel has got to be seriously seductive to those with ht systems. |
Sony is a mass market company and as such I doubt they want to support a niche market. The mass market probably won't adopt SACD because getting the most from each recording is not what they want and the high end market seems ambivalent about SACD. It will most likely not be a big money maker for Sony. They might license the technology out to niche producers, however, and give it up themselves. If you look back, the progressive steps that were taken were all very different. Reel to reel, LPs, cassettes, compact disc, even MP3s now, all of these are physically different, therefore a perceived advantage and afr easier to market. SACDs are just not that different and therefore less compelling (to the masses anyway). but even within the other formats there are variations, different tape materials, different types of LP pressings, that did not require a new type of machine to play them. A turntable plays any kind of LP. I think some people get turned off because SACD requires a wholly new machine, yet it's the same old format (the compact disc). The paradigm shift isn't perceived. And who wants two CDs of each album: one SACD for the home and one non-SACD for the car? |
I would have to agree with TWL..as someone who is contemplating returning to vinyl...I am kicking myself for selling all my pristine wax and TT years ago...I was young and dumb...and bought into the "perfect sound forever" campaign...a computer chip that transfers analog into a numerical sequence and them back again to form a "digital reproduction" of music is both complicated and not needed...I am beginning to be more cautious of technology these days...the latest advancement does not equate to an improvement...and even if it does...as is the case with SACD...there is no guarantee it will succeed...If SACD doesnt even make a dent...I will return to the fussy,sometimes equally frustrating analog world...but like everything else in life...there is no free lunch...you have to "work" in order to reap benefits... |
DTM, try Music Direct on the web. They have tons of albums new. And many new releases, as well as older titles that have been reissued. |
Twl, where do you buy new releases on LPs? I just got my TT up and running (you were part of that thread too), and would like to find some newly released music.
Also, I've heard SACD, and it really was better (Philips SACD1000 vs. Wadia 860x). I was pleasantly surprised; much improved depth of soundstage, and dynamics.
LPs also sound good, but I'm sure will be much better once I invest in a better cartridge and phono stage.
What I've come to realize, is that for CDs to sound great, you have to spend a TON of money on a high end player. For LPs and SACDs to sounds great, you don't have to spend as much. So, I'm sticking wtih my newly aquired $400 SACD player, and my $500 TT, and selling the $8000 cd player and paying off that credit card that never should have been charged in the first place! |
Brianmgrarcom, I agree. Not all think that LPs are for them. But the people who are happy with their digital aren't looking for new hi-rez formats. In fact, it seems that there is great opposition to the high-rez stuff on these pages, and one can only conclude that there is no desire for anything better than CD, for many people on this website. There have been numerous discussions, that I'm sure you've read, that show major opposition to hi-rez, ranging from claims that is not better than CD, to fears that their expensive gear and music collections may be obsoleted. Ones who are looking for better sound have some other alternatives, besides the next digi-disc of the month.
I never meant to say that analog is for everyone. Only for people that are looking for more out of their high end systems. Those that are satisfied with CD, can stay right where they are. |
Hi Phase,
Thanks for your post on my thread,"Want to get excited about SACD again"..a week or so ago.
God, I wish someone with power at Sony was reading several of the recent threads about SACD. Many good thoughts have been written and obvious interest/support of the format. |
TWL, with all due respect, not everyone thinks LP is the greatest, I do not diminish it's sonic performace, but I do not miss using LP's in the least nor have a desire to start using it. All source format's have their drawbacks. |
Have fun with 16/44.1.
I'm sticking with vinyl. If they can't get digital to sound better than vinyl after 22 years, and they can't get a higher resolution format to do it either, then they ain't gonna do it. Especially if the public isn't buying. The digital future is MP3 or something like it. You already got the best you're gonna get. The joke was played 22 years ago. Alot fell for it, and some didn't. I didn't think the joke was funny in 1981, and I don't think it's funny now.
If the major music companies can't get SACD or DVD-A to go over, then they will assume that there is no demand for a hi-rez format. They will just make some kind of suitable copy protection for whatever format they decide upon, which will likely be a compressed format for portable entertainment purposes(like MP3).
The fact is, you wanted your "Perfect sound forever", and you got it(?). You scorned the vinyl world, and embraced the digital devil. Now you have to live with it.
There is still a "sub-culture" in high end, known as "analog". These are the people getting the most from their source material. They are still being called "anachronists", "vinyl fetishists", "nostalgists", and "Luddites". I know, because I have to take that regularly.
At this time, there is, without a doubt, somewhat of a vinyl re-surgence. If enough went this route, there could be enough demand to keep a steady flow of new vinyl, and analog gear for the high end.
I think that this is what we should do. It will give us better sound, and eliminate the "angst" over new digital formats and copy protection crap.
Just how many times oversampling will it take to convince you that it just isn't going to happen? Oversampling, upsampling, downsampling, interpolation, no upsampling, jitter reducers, digital lenses, 1-bit, 20 bit, 24 bit, DSD, tube dacs, green pens, Buddhist chants. It just is not going to happen, folks. Time to wake up from the bad dream.
Get into analog, and there is your hi-rez format, just where it has always been.
I know this is hard medicine, but what do you think us vinyl guys have been having to swallow for over 20 years? We've watched all the music dry up, and go to digital formats. We've seen cost increases and less selection of our analog gear. We've borne the brunt of scorn from our fellow audiophiles. It hasn't been easy for us, but we've kept the vinyl flame alive for all of you, so that when this point came, there would be somewhere to go. If we hadn't done that, there would be no analog refuge from this digital crap-storm.
Join the analog resurgence, and make that the "new" hi-rez format that the manufacturers will support.
Just my 2 cents. |
Sadly I may have to agree with you. I ducked into the Sam Goody store at the nearest mall yesterday and asked the 16 year old nerd if they were stocking super audio cd's. His reply was "what?'. I repeated myself "are you stocking super audio cd's?" His answer was " is that the name of the band?"
It is a shame. Anybody that grew up on rock/pop should have the experience of listening to CCR's version of "I Heard It Through the Grapevine" and Bruce Cockburn's Anything Anytime Anywhere Singles 1979-2002 in its entirety on SACD through a high end stereo system. It will make you realize all over again why you fell in love with music. |
